The Revenue Act of 1862 was explicitly temporary, specifying a termination of income tax in "the year eighteen hundred and sixty-six". I would be very happy if every tax law had a four year expiration date.<quoted text>
On that we can absolutely agree. The FFs and both political parties believed taxing people's income needed to survive was an abomination.
Though as usual you leave out the details. "It wasn't until the Progressive movement of the early 1900's that a personal tax was considered."? First off it was Lincoln, a Republican, the first Republican President, that instituted the first Federal personal income tax to pay for the Civil War.
That aside for now. The 16th Amendment was conceived in 1909 and became law in 1913. Who was President during those years? William Howard Taft. A Republican.
To which will be retorted which party was the majority in Congress during his terms. The answer, Republican. So you are saying Republicans are the Progressives?
Detailed research of the record proves it has always been the Republicans who have moved to saddle the general citizenry with Federal income taxes to defer the intended responsibility of taxes on capital gains of the richest and corporations.
Granted Lincoln really had no choice because there was the Civil War being fought needing to be paid for. Same as with WWI and WWII as wars need to be paid for. Not so much in recent history were the only wars in the U.S. history there were no provisions made to pay for them. In fact after the wars were engaged in taxes were lowered and the people told to go shopping.
So to lay it on the "progressive movement" is simply transference.
I used Progressive because what Republicans and Democrats stand for changes all the time. I believe that some of the earliest proponents were the Communists, but I don't think that folks in favor of an income tax are communists. Personally I think both parties are only different in their degree. They both want to spend more than we should and tax more than we should simply because they want to get elected. Raising taxes on the top 1% will truly net very little revenue so it's just a political ploy to appeal to specific groups. Neither party is serious about spending cuts, they both just want to spend too much but on different ways.